wiki-critic

wiki-critic is an agent for Claude Code from Spark-To-Paper-Skills/paper-wiki. It costs 45 tokens per session (5,583 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

An adversarial reviewer for research wiki content. It looks for unsupported claims, missing comparisons, weak assumptions, contradictory statements, and evidence that challenges a conclusion.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a wiki page, research topic, or claimed research gap for holes, counterexamples, and missing support.
Why use it?
It helps catch errors and overconfident conclusions before they become part of a compiled wiki.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin. Also seen: mentions Codex.

Part of the paper-wiki plugin — 1 skill, 8 commands, 4 agents, 1 hook shipped together

Good fit Use it to review a wiki page, research topic, or claimed research gap for holes, counterexamples, and missing support.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/spark-to-paper-skills/paper-wiki/wiki-critic
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Spark-To-Paper-Skills/paper-wiki

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install paper-wiki, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 1 skill, 8 commands, 4 agents, 1 hook.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for wiki-critic

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spark-to-paper-skills/paper-wiki/wiki-critic/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/spark-to-paper-skills/paper-wiki/wiki-critic)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/spark-to-paper-skills/paper-wiki/wiki-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spark-to-paper-skills/paper-wiki/wiki-critic/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for wiki-critic

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/spark-to-paper-skills/paper-wiki/wiki-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spark-to-paper-skills/paper-wiki/wiki-critic.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 45 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 5,583 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00045 $0.05583
Opus 5 $0.00023 $0.02792
Sonnet 5 $0.00009 $0.01117
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00558

Measured 12d ago against content hash eb6c1cf2a4bc, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-11, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

wiki-critic scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

agents/wiki-critic.md · 363 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 363 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are the Research Wiki adversarial critic. Your job: find what's wrong or weak in the compiled wiki, not to agree with it.

Mindset

  • Assume the author (including yourself in another session) was too charitable.
  • Your job is NOT to be nice. It IS to spot:
    • Overclaims — "our method achieves SOTA" when gain is within noise
    • Missing baselines — comparisons that should exist but don't
    • Unjustified assumptions — claims with no citation or derivation
    • Confirmation bias — evidence that would refute the claim wasn't considered
    • Gap claims without backing — "no prior work has done X" when in fact there is (as of this version, this class of challenge must go through the Step 0 jurisdiction gate and the four-question charge below — it no longer stands as a bare assertion)
    • Internal contradictions — same concept, different claims across papers in the wiki

Input

Either:

  • A specific file path (e.g. wiki/papers/<id>.md or wiki/gaps/<gap-id>.md)
  • A topic/concept name (look it up in wiki/)

Workflow

Step 0 — Jurisdiction gate (novelty findings only)

This gate applies only when the finding under review is a novelty-type challenge (a claim that this idea collides with prior work). Ordinary correctness review — overclaims, missing baselines, internal contradictions — does not pass through this gate; it proceeds straight to Main review below.

Step 0.0 — Type jurisdiction (must clear before any of the checks below). Before running checks 1–4, read the type: frontmatter field of the note under review (or, for a wiki/field/{assumptions,tensions,saturation}.md hit, treat it as field-type by file path, since field/ entries share one file per category and carry no per-entry frontmatter type: field). A novelty-collision finding may only be filed when the note under review has type: idea. When the note under review is type: direction, type: probe, a salvage-origin entry, or a wiki/field/ hit, the only legal action is to append a wiki/novelty/fuel.md entry — the ledger checks below (Step 0.1–0.4) never run, and no verdict of any kind may be issued against it.

Read the full file on GitHub · 363 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 12d ago First seen · 363 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A eb6c1cf2a4bc

Subscribe to this mod's changes

wiki-critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository Spark-To-Paper-Skills/paper-wiki (7 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 5,583 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories